DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 July 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the flow control assembly (claim 1), the pressure control assembly (claim 1), and the flow limiting member (claim 4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses the phrase “is disclosed” in line 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshikawa (U.S. Patent 6,684,651).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshikawa discloses a circulation valve (FIG. 1) configured to control a flow of a refrigerant, comprising:
a flow control assembly in which a containing cavity (inside 1, 2, 3) and a plurality of sub-channels (6, 7, 8) are formed, wherein the plurality of sub-channels all communicate with the containing cavity, a slide block 27 is disposed in the containing cavity, the slide block is configured to move in the containing cavity to control the number of the sub-channels communicating with the containing cavity, and the slide block divides the containing cavity into a first containing cavity R1 and a second containing cavity R2 that do not communicate with each other; and
a pressure control assembly, configured to control a ratio of a pressure of the first containing cavity to a pressure of the second containing cavity so as to drive the slide block to move in the containing cavity (FIG. 1-3; Col. 44 ln 38-Col. 49 ln 3).
Regarding claim 2, Yoshikawa discloses the flow control assembly further comprises a second baffle 12 and a connecting rod 28, which, together with the slide block, define the first containing cavity;
one end of the connecting rod is connected to the second baffle, and the other end is connected to the slide block (FIG. 1); and
the second baffle is linked up with the slide block to maintain a constant space size of the first containing cavity (FIG. 1; Col. 45 ln 15-25).
Regarding claim 3, Yoshikawa discloses the flow control assembly further comprises a spring 13 having one end abutting against the second baffle and the other end abutting against an inner wall (at 3) of the containing cavity, and configured to drive the baffle and the slide block to reset (FIG. 1; Col. 45 ln 4-14, Col. 46 ln 16-35).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshikawa discloses the pressure control assembly comprises:
a circulating conduit 5 communicating with the first containing cavity (Col. 44 ln 48-65);
a pressure-dividing conduit 14 communicating with the second containing cavity (Col. 45 ln 56-62);
a flow limiting member (diameter of the inlet of 14), configured to reduce a flow of the pressure-dividing conduit and/or the circulating conduit to control the ratio of the pressure of the first containing cavity to the pressure of the second containing cavity; and
a main conduit (See FIG. 1; 4-5-7-8-6), one end of which is for the refrigerant to flow into, and the other end of which communicates with the circulating conduit and/or the pressure-dividing conduit (FIG. 1-2; Col. 44 ln 48-65, Col. 45 ln 56-62).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshikawa discloses the flow limiting member is a capillary tube having one end connected to the main conduit (at 7) and the other end communicating (the other end of 14 empties into R2, the pressure of which communicates with the pressure of R1, controlled in part by 5) with the circulating conduit, and configured to reduce the flow of the refrigerant (the smaller diameter of 14 compared to that of 5, 6, 7, 8 reduces the volume of flow); and/or,
the ratio of the pressure of the first containing cavity to the pressure of the second containing cavity is (0.3-0.75):1 (FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Yoshikawa discloses a moving direction (left to right in FIG. 1 orientation) of the slide block is a length direction, the number of the sub-channels is N, and N is greater than 2; and
a length of the slide block is greater than a sum of lengths of N-1 sub-channels (FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Yoshikawa discloses an air conditioner (Col. 44 ln 38-40), comprising a condenser 9A/9B, an evaporator 9B/9A (Col. 44 ln 48-65), a compressor 4 and the circulation valve according to claim 1 (FIG. 1-3; Col. 44 ln 38-Col. 49 ln 3), wherein
the condenser 9B is configured to convert a gaseous refrigerant into a liquid refrigerant (Col. 104 ln 16-25), and one end of the condenser communicates with the compressor, and the other end communicates with the circulation valve (See FIG. 1; all components are in communication with each other);
one end of the evaporator 9A communicates with the circulation valve, and the other end communicates with the compressor (See FIG. 1; all components are in communication with each other); and
the circulation valve is located between the evaporator and the condenser, and configured to control a flow of the liquid refrigerant (FIG. 1-3; Col. 44 ln 38-Col. 49 ln 3, Col. 104 ln 1-25).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshizawa in view of Heffner (U.S. Patent 5,038,827).
Regarding claim 10, Yoshizawa discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 9.
Yoshizawa is silent regarding the number of the evaporator is consistent with the number of a sub-channel; and
a plurality of sub-channels are respectively connected to a plurality of evaporators in a one-to-one correspondence form.
However, Heffner teaches a shuttle valve 10 for a refrigeration system 100 wherein the number of the evaporator104/106 is consistent with the number of a sub-channel 14/16; and
a plurality of sub-channels are respectively connected to a plurality of evaporators in a one-to-one correspondence form (FIG. 1; Col. 3 ln 4-13, Col. 4 ln 60-Col. 5 ln 37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Yoshizawa by adding enough evaporators such that there is an evaporator connected to each sub-channel in a one-to-one correspondence, as taught by Heffner, for the purpose of providing a means to manually alter the pressure differences between the sub-channels in order to manipulate the slide block into the desired position.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art fails to anticipate or make obvious the flow limiting member is a capillary tube comprising a first capillary tube and a second capillary tube; the pressure-dividing conduit comprises a second pressure-dividing conduit; one end of the first capillary tube communicates with the main conduit, and the other end communicates with the second pressure-dividing conduit and the second capillary tube; the second pressure-dividing conduit communicates with the second containing cavity; and one end of the second capillary tube communicates with the first capillary tube, and the other end communicates with the circulating conduit, along with the other limitations of the claims.
Furthermore, the closest prior art fails to anticipate or make obvious an electromagnetic structure configured to control the communication or disconnection of the pressure-dividing conduit to control the ratio of the pressure of the first containing cavity to the pressure of the second containing cavity, along with the other limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Aoki (U.S. Patent 4,760,709) discloses a valve similar to the one disclosed in the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00-3:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig M Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753